House Cuts Transgender People from Hate Crimes Bill
Washington - Even as the Senate passed a hate crimes bill sought for a decade by gays and lesbians, House Democratic leaders decided Thursday to strip transgender people from another long-languishing civil rights bill, generating dismay in the gay community and furious but fruitless lobbying for more time.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and Reps. George Miller, D-Martinez, Barney Frank, D-Mass., and Tammy Baldwin, D-Wis., believe they lack the votes in the Democrat-controlled House to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act if it includes gender identity along with sexual orientation as a prohibited ground for firing an employee.
Frank and Baldwin are the only openly gay members of Congress.
“People now accept the fact that we just don’t have the votes for the transgender,” Frank said.
Nervous Democrats had been hearing about Republican amendments to the employment bill, Frank said, “that would talk about schoolteachers, and what happens when the kid comes back from summer vacation and teachers change gender. We just lost enough Democrats and we couldn’t be sure of the Republicans.”
The move put a damper Thursday on what Democrats otherwise were hailing as a landmark day for gay rights.
The hate crimes legislation is the first major victory by gay activists since Democrats assumed control of Congress in January. It marks a major shift in direction after fights over same-sex marriage roiled the 2004 elections and put the gay rights movement on the defensive.
The hate crimes bill would add sexual orientation, transgender identity, gender and disability to current federal hate crimes law, which covers violence motivated by race, color, religion and national origin.
The law provides aid to state and local law enforcement officials, if they request it and the U.S. attorney general approves, to investigate and prosecute such crimes.
Some gay activists said Democratic leaders were worried that including transgender people in the employment discrimination bill would expose conservative House Democrats to a tough vote.
Frank dismissed that charge as “stupid.”
“They had no idea what they were talking about,” Frank said. “We put them to a vote on transgender hate crimes. We’re going to put them to a vote on sexual orientation. The problem wasn’t that we were afraid of it. We just didn’t have the votes.”
To those who argue Frank and other Democrats were caving in by dropping transgender people from the employment discrimination bill, he said, “Have they been living in Sweden and thinking they were in America for the last 20 years? We’re going to go ahead with sexual orientation for the first time in American history. Why would timid people be pushing people to do that?”
Frank promised hearings on a separate bill later directed at workplace discrimination against transgender people to help educate lawmakers and the public. The definition of transgender is still in flux, but includes transvestites, people who have changed their gender and others whose sexual identity, as opposed to orientation, is at issue.
Oddly enough, the hate crimes bill that passed the Senate Thursday includes transgender people and won 60-39, the supermajority necessary to beat a Republican filibuster. All 49 Senate Democrats voted for it, along with two independents and nine Republicans. Sen. Larry Craig, the Idaho Republican trying to reverse his guilty plea to soliciting sex in a men’s airport bathroom, voted against the legislation.
Gay activists argued that transgender people are among those most in need of discrimination protection. Getting some future bill passed just for them will be much harder than including them now with gays and lesbians, who are increasingly accepted by society. Activists were outraged.
“This is morally reprehensible and politically inexplicable,” said Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. “My experience across the country is whenever a gay bill moves, there are last-minute jitters. … You work on getting the votes, not abandoning part of our community.”
Action on the employment discrimination bill was scheduled for a House vote this week, but was delayed in the House Education and Labor Committee, which Miller chairs, as Democrats canvassed members.
Frank argued that passing a hate crimes bill protecting transgender people has always been easier than including them in an employment discrimination bill.
“Simply protecting, or trying to protect someone against assault is very different from saying you have to hire the person and let them live here and sleep here, etc., etc.” Frank said. “Obviously, we didn’t think that was persuasive.”
Removing transgender people may do little to appease conservative groups. Matt Barber, policy director for Concerned Women for America, said his group is “opposed to the concept of granting suspect minority status to any group based on behaviors, as opposed to immutable characteristics.” The hate crimes bill, known as the Matthew Shepherd Act, was successfully attached by Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., to the Senate legislation authorizing funding for the Iraq war and the Pentagon. A similar measure passed the House on May 3 as a free-standing bill, drawing a veto threat from President Bush.
By attaching the measure to a bill that authorizes spending for the Iraq war, Democrats have put the White House in a difficult corner, potentially forcing Bush to veto the entire legislation over the hate crimes provision.
White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said veto threats have been issued on several provisions in the defense bill. “Given that there are so many different things that a senior adviser might recommend a veto on, I’m not going to say specifically on this, but our position has been consistent” in opposing the hate crimes legislation, Perino said.
The legislation is named for Shepherd, who in one of the nation’s most notorious anti-gay crimes, was beaten into a coma and left on a barbed wire fence in Wyoming in 1998.
Republicans argued the bill was unnecessary and amounted to a vast expansion of federal intervention into local law enforcement.
Federal crime statistics show that 27,432 people were victims of hate-motivated violence over the last three years. Estimates from the Southern Poverty Law Center double that number based on other surveys.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, called the bill unnecessary and unconstitutional, noting that Shepherd’s murderers, Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney, were both sentenced to two consecutive life terms in prison.
© 2007 San Francisco Chronicle
Come-on, you have to leave the right somebody to hate….how can they get elected without easy scapegoats?;)
..or targets.
I guess they had to throw Lary Craig a boner…er, bone.
Well he’s just “sort of gay” so does that mean I can kill him? He’s black but isn’t really dark colored so does that mean he qualifies? He “looks kind of Middle Eastern” so where does he fit in?
A hate crime is a hate crime.
This is a supposed FREE country and if you hurt another American because of their religion, color, sex, sexual orientation, or hairstyle or whatever, you need your head examined. Senator Hatch is openly supporting discrimination.
The “We don’t have the votes” excuse is getting old. Ms. Pelosi should resign as completely incompetent. Mike Gravel should take over as speaker. I don’t believe a word Pelosi says anymore.
““People now accept the fact that we just don’t have the votes for the transgender,” Frank said.”
Yes, the only ones who don’t accept the fact are, of course, transgender people.
Like Brandon Teena and Gwen Araujo and the many nameless and faceless ones throughout America.
it’s called compromise, people. when the system is so fucked up, it’s sometimes necessary.
A Congressman never stands so tall as when he stoops to kick a transgendered person!
You know, it’s probably not too early to start composing tributes for Hillary’s inauguration.
I’m just spitballing here– but how about a musical number called “Brandon Teena in Hell”, in which moderate Dems encircle Brandon and sing, “Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good!”?
It’ll take the taste of that Karl Rove/David Gregory hip-hop abomination right out of the national mouth.
And we chastised Iran for saying something about Gays?
Hypocrites R’ Us!
Whom to hate and kill?
Will it be necessary to ban the Bible for humanity to live in peace?
Whatfools: This is why I am cheerfully Neo-pagan.
This is so depressing. What good is a hate crimes bill that doesn’t protect everyone on the basis of any kind of difference? Why do they even have to delineate different kinds of difference in the bill? Why don’t they just say that it is illegal to perpetrate acts of violence against people on the basis of any aspect of their identity? There is so much shallow thinking running rampant in our government. And they all just nod and go along with each other, reinforcing each other’s stupidity.
Next it will be blue eyed people have more protection than green eyed people…
PLEASETHINK
why don’t they just say that it is illegal to perpetrate acts of violence against people. full stop.
Ch473 -
Sorry but there can be no compromise when it comes to civil rights. I will NEVER make any kind of compromise to the face of freedom or justice.
Did our founding fathers make a compromise? Did Abraham Lincoln make a compromise? Did Martin King make a compromise?
It is unreasonable to suggest that tyranny or fascism be compromised with.
The self-righteous Americans denounced Iran president on this. This BILL proves that Americans do not see their face in the mirror or they must be looking at their face in a distorted mirror?????????????
Thank you Coco–I absolutely agree. You said what I was really thinking. The law should not be based on identity AT ALL. I just censored myself because I think this country is a pathetically long way away from relinquishing the notion of identity as the basis of rights.
Here we go segmenting the second-class population. Unbelieveable that we live in this day and age. Orrin Hatch is a piece of s**t because he fails to understand that even though Matt’s killers were sent to life in prison, the case bankrupt the Laramie prosecutor’s office and they had to lay off people. What a f**king moron. This Act would provide the funding Laramie desperately needed for the case.
Are not trans-gender people citizens of the United States? If they truly are, then there should not be any further discrimination against them or any other group the Rightwingnuts love to hate.
“Nervous Democrats had been hearing about Republican amendments to the employment bill, Frank said, “that would talk about schoolteachers, and what happens when the kid comes back from summer vacation and teachers change gender.”
What would happen is that children would learn that the world is not, black or white, not always a situation of either this or that, heaven forbid-democrat or republican, that individuals are in control of their own identity and don’t have to accept the ones society mandates they be. And oh my gosh! the sales of antidepressants might plummet as people realize that they can be happy with who they are or whoever they want to be.
until then
somewhere over the rainbow…
I have so much respect for Barney Frank.
He is a wonderful human being.
But I still say ALL people shoud be protected.
Regardless.
I know this isn’t going to sound right, but it’s just my opinion.
Until crime, the economy, the Government, gas prices, the stock market, health care, the war, loss of rights, lies, disease, the weather, global warming, education, or any other aspect of U.S life, affects 25-55 year old white males, nothing will ever change in this country.
Once a middle aged white male suffers some sort of pain or suffering then the wheels begin to turn in a new direction.
Everyone else doesn’t count. And because middle aged white males feel like gays, abortion, and the war don’t really affect them in a negative way nothing gets done.
By hating gays, it makes them macho and cool.
By being against abortion it gives them control and shows how they are willing and have the means to take care of their children while all the poor and brown/yellow/red people cannot.
(if your poor and white you sort of get grouped with poor and brown)
The war is a tough man thing, being pro-war is what being a “MAN” is all about. Guns and death and cool tanks and planes.
And it makes alot of white middle aged males wealthy.
It’s just the way the world spins. To bad those middle aged white man don’t have to feel the hard fist of a hate filled person against their face, or hear the sad cries of a hungry baby, or feel the burning sensation of a bullit burrowing its way through their flesh. And seeing the woman they love more than life it self, cry in pain and agony as they are laid to rest.
~Future~
Terrorists externally.
Gays and Transgenders at home.
A near perfect system, I’d say.
Rumor has it that soon coming -
we’ll be able to add Extraterrestrials to the list.
Werner Van Braun, who appears to have been privy to the schemings of the “inner circle,” spent the last years of his life, warning that the extended order of battle had already been decided: “First, the Communists, then Rogue States and Terrorists, Then Extraterrestrials.”
(While he knew we were already “doing business” with the latter group, he also knew that we had already reverse engineered
a chunk of their technology. The proposed future “attacks” by ET’s would be further “false flag” operations - which would originate right here at home.
As Rich 1107 wrote:
“Come-on, you have to leave the right somebody to hate….how can they get elected without easy scapegoats?;)”
pleasethink September 28th, 2007 3:04 pm
“Why don’t they just say that it is illegal to perpetrate acts of violence against people on the basis of any aspect of their identity?”
Only enlightened human beings are capable of compassion and concern for others. The rest associate violence with power; spilling the blood of those they consider inferior makes them feel important. It’s a sad state of affairs - and a global one!
coco sez,
“PLEASETHINK why don’t they just say that it is illegal to perpetrate acts of violence against people. full stop.”
coco and others: most cases of murder, battery, etc. are punished under state and local laws. What federal hate crime legislation does is allow the Feds to intervene to get justice for crimes against certain classes of people. Crimes that in some states (Louisiana comes to mind) might get overlooked because of bigotry in the system.
They are unfortunately necessary. Please think, indeed.
If the Democrats are so pathetic they can’t even bring themselves to support something as elementary as protecting trannies against hate crimes, how can anyone hold out any hope that the same Democrats will ever do anything about ending the Iraq war or preventing a new one with Iran?
Truly, it’s time for the Democrats to declare moral and political bankruptcy.
Compromise on human rights is indefensible and reprehensible.
And yet Khomenei, (yes the Ayatollah) wrote about the right of transgendered people to sex change operations as early as 1963, and Khamenei his successor reissued a fatwa supporting sex change operations for transgendered people.
Check this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/4115535.stm
Or this
http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/35/15513
He’s been saying the same thing about employment discrimination for years. http://tinyurl.com/yvdjbm
Don’t be fooled by the whole “we’re on the verge of passing ENDA” BS, either. He’s said that forever.
Bottom line: if they don’t have a spine, don’t vote for them. Lesser of two evils is a myth.
Message to Congress, if any of you are reading: wake up! Your abysmal approval ratings are because you are showing a profound lack of courage, which has been, and continues to be, nothing more than a red carpet for the neocons to walk all over us. We’re flipping sick of it, and if you don’t fix this *soon* - we’ll elect someone who will, which means you. will. be. out. of. a job. Get it?
None of this is a shock to me though - he’s a politician, and politicians above all act in their own self-interest, just like most people who use the system for their own selfish personal gain. Until we, the people of the US, start implementing grass-roots democracy at a local level, independent of politicians and on our own terms, the most marginalized in our society will be trampled on like so much dust by the likes of Mr. Frank, who in my humble opinion, is nothing more than a kindler, gentler version of a right-wing opportunist by definition.
I guess old Barney forgets how his voice sounds.There is a girlie sound in his and many other gays voicesI have heard over the years. Well then why can’t a person hiring just say I will not hire you because you sound like a transgender person,
I guess if this bill was past way back when J Edger Hoover wore dresses he could have been fired lol
This country is getting nuttier by the day . They go after President Clinton for getting a head while his successor sits in the White House doing God only knows things. Maybe that is partly what is wrong with Bush ? He plays with hhimself too much? Is Bush covered in this bill? He better be or a whole lot of people will also never get hired or lose their jobs.
“Pleasethink” and “Coco” have it 100% right. Hate, period, is unacceptable. As was said in that old chestnut of a musical, “South Pacific”, - “you’ve got to be taught to hate and fear. . . you’ve got to be carefully taught”.
That’s the problem with “hate crimes” legislation: anyone not listed in a hate-crimes bill is fair game as a target of hate.
>Kennedy is so far left he becomes a fascist. It is enough to make you want to vote Lilbertarian.
Well, speaking of being nutty, I’m not quite ready to vote Libertarian just yet. ;-D However, they sometimes make reference to up a good analysis of the political spectrum, that includes people’s relationship with power as well as left and right.
The chart that diagrams the analysis is here: http://politicalcompass.org/printablegraph.php?ec=-1.13&soc=-9.13
The test for it (it’s free, no spam, etc.) is here: http://politicalcompass.org/
>That’s the problem with “hate crimes” legislation: anyone not listed in a hate-crimes bill is fair game as a target of hate.
Not only that, but sometimes it backfires - a black guy gets assaulted by a racist white cop, and voila! Because the black guy kicked back and said “you cracker,” guess who gets the hate crimes charge slapped on them? American justice is anything but blind, people - it’s pretty near impossible to address institutional oppression under an oppressive system. Change the system to one that is both just and not totalitarian, then you have a chance.
That being said, I do support comprehensive anti-discrimination law, because it does address the extremes of institutional -isms (housing discrimination, hate crimes) on a federal level. However, it is a slippery slope in many ways, and diligence is required from the public independent of the government, otherwise it will *always* be abused.
Well, I’m sorry to say this is hardly a surprise. But I have a somewhat different perspective than most here regarding what this means and its real significance.
First, the obvious - the dumping of transpeople from ENDA is mainly about punishing people who don’t “pass,” or have trouble appearing as a member of their identified sex. I pass reasonably well, and so I haven’t personally faced too much in the way of workplace discrimination or hate motivated crime for that matter over the last ten or so years since I transitioned. On the other hand, I have friends who have not been so lucky, and so for them this is a double-whammy, in that not only are they set-up as cannon-fodder for all the insecure (mainly) men out there, but they are then told that by being true to their own self they will actually lose the right to employment. So much for the inalienable right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. For a capitalist society with few (read:no) social programs aimed at helping transpeople, increased computerization of identity records in the name of “Homeland Security” with employer access to these records, and with outrageous media portrayals that fetishize us and our experiences, this is essentially saying: stay out of our sight or we’ll f**king kill you - one way or another.
Second and perhaps less obvious is the fact that this vitriol is mainly focused on male to female transpeople. I can’t tell you how many times people have expressed disbelief that I would want to be female in this society. I understand what they mean now, because a lot of the problems I face are really more about misogyny than transphobia or cissexism. But few can speak with more authority about the disparaging of women in this society than transwomen, so it is not surprising that our voices would be silenced and cast aside and our identities claimed fake, lest we put an end to this grand charade of the supposed superiority of masculinity and male bodies. An excellent recent book that examines this idea is Julia Serano’s “Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity.”
Third, there are a whole lot more transpeople than the general public realizes. Recent studies using surgeons’ records place a lower bound on the prevalence of post-operative transsexuals at 1 in 2500 U.S. citizens. Since transsexuals represent the extreme end of the gender spectrum, the number of transgendered can be assumed to be much larger, given the high economic, social, and legal costs associated with transition. So we are talking about a large number of disaffected people here. See, for example: http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/conway/TS/TSprevalence.html
Fourth, I find it amazing that we can see article after article talking about sex-reversed fish in many streams worldwide, myriad sexual changes in other species due to pesticides, dioxins, PCBs, phthlates, and other hormonally-active chemicals, yet many seem to take the position that humans are immune from these effects. You can believe what you want to believe, of course, but it is already known that the potent estrogen drug diethylstilbestrol, given to millions of pregnant women from the 1940’s to the 1970’s, induced transsexual changes in some sons. So this is all just a big joke in my mind that we keep pretending this isn’t happening. If gender identity is a social construction, as some claim, then there is no explanation for the fact that I was female identified at 3 years old. My experience is that this is the way I was born, period. And I am hardly alone in my experience.
Meanwhile, as the Democrats are arguing why transpeople should be sacrificed for a supposed greater good, the sex-ratio among the Inuit of Greenland and other Artic regions is radically shifting. Fewer boys are being born. Fiddling while Rome burns indeed.
Restive: I took the test. I scored in the same area as Ghandi and Nelson Mandela–not bad company at all!
Freedoms and protections should be for all people. The first time we protected people based on this or that attribute was the beginning of all this mess. Get rid of all the additional laws and simply state that all people are protected. Period.